prototype gun

[DRG]

http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/revea...eadly-new-gun/

The prototypes barrel length is 7.5 meters with a length to caliber ratio of at least 60:1, Popular Science notes, which is a larger ratio than the current largest 120 mm cannon in service, and would allow for larger rounds that store more propellant explosives. Popular Science also lists additional technical specifications:

This multipurpose cannon reportedly has a muzzle velocity of 2,000m per second for armored piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) rounds, whose discarding sabot concentrates the kinetic energy from propellant into frontal area of the penetrator rod, which is the size of a half dollar coin. For comparison, current Chinese 125mm APFSDS have a 1700m/s muzzle velocity, the German L55 has a muzzle velocity of 1,750m/s, and the US’s M829A3 APFSDS round has a muzzle velocity of only 1,555m (but uses a larger penetrator with increased mass to increase imparted kinetic energy).

.......The new one piece 125mm ammunition will allow for larger APFSDS [Armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding-sabot] rods, while keeping the caliber to 125mm to save weight, as opposed to scaling up to a larger caliber, such as 140mm.

The cannon will now undergo thorough testing by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and could be used for the next generation of Chinese main battle tanks (the turrets of current Chinese tanks in service appear to be too small to accommodate a gun of this size), although the pictures published on the Popular Science website showed it mounted on a towed carriage.

....theres more on that website..

[Suhiir]

E=MC²

One can assume given a penetrator of the same mass and material that 2000 m/s vs 1555 m/s would produce 22% better results. As mentioned this new Chinese gun has a higher velocity then either the German or American, but the American uses a heavier penetrator.

The real question is - How much better (if at all) is the penetration?

[halstein]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

E=MC²

Hi.
You mean E=1/2MV², for kinetic energy. C=speed of light in vacuum. The E=MC² is what you get when turning mass into energy (like in fusion). However it is as we see that raising the velocity is more efficient than raising mass.

Halstein, the physics teacher.

[Suhiir]

I stand corrected!

BUT ... how many "normal" people recognize E=1/2MV²? Everyone knows Einstein.

[halstein]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

I stand corrected!

BUT ... how many "normal" people recognize E=1/2MV²? Everyone knows Einstein.

But Einstein's formula is not about kinetic (movement) energy. It is how much energy you get, when converting mass into energy. If one use a mass of 4 grams (weight of 5.56mm SS109-bullet), E=MC² gives an energy equal to 5.7 "Little Boy"-bombs.

The formulas are about two different sorts of energy. C=speed of light in vacuum.

Halstein (who might suffer from a work related injury )

[DRG]

Just remember Suhiir's a former USMC and the subtle nuances of physics equasions is not part of their job discription


That said I think everyone undertands if you take Mass X penetrator and drive it at Y velocity then increase the velocity and repeat the test the mass X will drive deeper into the target with the higher velocity ( with the added bonus of a flatter trajectory )......and IF that 22% estimate is valid that would put its sabot pen somewhere around 115 in game terms which drills holes in just about everything IF they can perfect it and IF they can fit that big mother into a tank turret and IF they can reliably feed rounds into it and IF they can make the entire package something smaller and tougher than just being the largest , most tempting target on the battlefield......... IF .like IF the thing holds together under the increased pressures for more than 100 firings

Don

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by DRG

Just remember Suhiir's a former USMC and the subtle nuances of physics equasions is not part of their job discription



Don

Very true!
My areas of "expertise" are Nuc-Bio-Chem, Intel Analysis, and Military Police.